Re: Problem with Bitmap Heap Scan

From: rushabh <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Problem with Bitmap Heap Scan
Date: 2008-11-20 04:16:06
Message-ID: 4924E486.2020205@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Rushabh Lathia" <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>
>> Simple select give wrong result when it uses the Bitmap Heap Scan path.
>>
>
> It's generally appropriate to mention which PG version you're working
> with when you report a bug.
>
I was on 8.4 CVS Head, Next time will sure take care of this.
>
>> postgres=# explain select proname from pg_proc where proname like 'my_pro1';
>> QUERY
>> PLAN
>>
>
>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -------------
>> Bitmap Heap Scan on pg_proc (cost=4.26..8.27 rows=1 width=64)
>> Recheck Cond: (proname ~~ 'my_pro1'::text)
>> -> Bitmap Index Scan on pg_proc_proname_args_nsp_index (cost=0.00..4.26
>> row
>> s=1 width=0)
>> Index Cond: ((proname >= 'my'::name) AND (proname < 'mz'::name))
>> (4 rows)
>>
>
> Hmm, the ~~ condition should get treated as a "filter" not a "recheck".
> I suppose I broke this somewhere ...
>
Oh ok.
> regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2008-11-20 04:35:44 Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)
Previous Message KaiGai Kohei 2008-11-20 04:06:13 Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1197)